In our May feature, we addressed the typical Leftist tactic of misdirecting public focus away from the actual causation of perceived "problems," to fantasized targets; a practice that prevents either solution or mitigation of any "problem." [Misdirection: Dangerous Leftist Tactic] Here we challenge the single most significant & egregious example of such misdiretion, the Collectivist/Humanist "politically correct" answer to problems that flow from a failure to respect others, by suppressing focus on, or even awareness of, the vast differences in human aptitudes, motivations, priorities & the varied cultural achievements of each community or nation--reflected in all we once celebrated under the inspiring label of heritage.

A personal introduction to the technique, and our response, is described in Surrender By Subterfuge; which recounts phenomena long before the term "politically correct" came into common usage; yet for insight into the mental state of contemporary Trump haters, is more relevant today than it was as analysis of corrupting rhetoric in the 1950s. What Norman Cousins advocated was simply a deliberate refusal to look at underlying differences--which can lead to problems between nations--as a make believe approach to the future. In brief, problems or ambitions leading to conflicts, would have been better addressed by learning to respect others--rather than in a fantasy of interchangeability--coupled with acceptance of the reality of human complexity: In short, in a mutual celebration of the very differences, Cousins sought to wish away.

What were at stake--what remain at stake--are the very diverse heritages of Mankind; the aggregated achievements of striving generations of each of the earth's peoples. Understanding the differences between the make believe pseudo-reality, that some international humanists advocate, and human interaction based upon mutual respect for each others' heritages, is directly analogous to that between a socially destructive war of the sexes & the traditional French toast to "viva the difference."

The misdirection from recognizing the causation of actual problems, arising in disrespect, to an egalitarian fantasy consistent with a Compulsion For Uniformity, not only leads to (rather than resists) a tendency to impose monolithic social norms. It has already led to genocidal events & cultural suppression in numerous instances, some discussed in detail in "Democracy" In The Third World, which addresses what happens when arbitrary "one man/one vote" Democracy is imposed on nations, with very different cultures, forced to live together within what were formerly colonial administrative borders, based upon an insulting fantasy that we are all somehow interchangeable.

This is not the path to peace, rather one that polarizes combatants; one that leads to a destruction of generations of social achievement; to the death of inspiration, the loss of purpose, rather than healthy aspiration. On the other hand, it explains why egalitarian internationalists so despise Donald Trump. In returning America to her Constitutional purpose, he threatens their multi-generational effort to abort our very continuity as a people. [What Drives The Trump Haters]

We would be clear from the outset. What Conservatives demand for America, the continuity of our heritage, respect for the values, achievements, culture & identity, which make us unique, may legitimately be claimed as a natural birthright. But it is not something that we have any natural right to force on any other people. Each tribe or nation has its own heritage; and when we speak of "mutual respect," both common sense & the "Golden Rule" clearly mandate recognition of the right of each to preserve their heritage & build upon it, provided only that they do not do so via an unprovoked attack on any other people. Of course, the right of self-defense is inherent to all forms of life; and that right includes or extends to, a right to form alliances for that purpose.

With that one qualification--we recognize that every people has a natural right to the continuity of heritage in their own lands;--that every nation has the right to control its own borders; control who may enter; define the terms of such entrance; define its own citizenry, pecking orders, political & social institutions; the role, if any, of a State supported Faith. For America to preserve what was won at Yorktown, does not & never has implied a slight to anyone. For America to return to an immigration policy based both on merit, and a process of screening for cultural compatibility, is only common sense; a process, in fact, required by the explicit language of the Preamble to our written Constitution:

We the people of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

What we have had since 1965, both on immigration & much of our domestic social policy, however, is a complete denial of common sense. On immigration, the Left has succeeded in employing immigration in ways that ignore questions of merit & actually undermine cultural continuity. On domestic policy, the Left has increasingly ignored both merit & compatibility, to pursue arbitrary goals in both employment & academic acceptance, where the idiotic goal appears to be participation by members of each group-whether defined by sex, race or ethnic origin--in the exact proportion that the population, so defined, bears to the general population, at large.

As often observed, no one ever sat in a classroom with their equal on either side--unless an identical sibling. No one! Some were better or worse at this; or that; or in many or few of the vast array of human variables. What they were never was precisely equal. The notion that any population segment would have the same complex array of facets or functions, motivations, incentives or disincentives, as any other, absolutely defies the law of probabilities.

What "affirmative action" policies accomplish, demonstrates another very egregious facet of the subject of "misdirection." Instead of seeking quality in employment or matriculation, the focus first shifts to the pursuit of an arbitrary quota. This is particularly sad in its effect on those mistakenly perceived as "beneficiaries"; because, while very few of us are accomplished in all potentially beneficial aptitudes, almost everyone has some useful aptitudes, which could be developed both for personal & social benefit. For example, consider how analogous Feminist agitation has undermined Western women, in this excerpt from Return Of The Gods: Women Hostage To Contrived Delusion.

But the ill effects of arbitrary quotas in employment & matriculation, are not limited to wasted resources at the job site, and/or to the present decline in the quality of education. The rationalizations for an absurd pursuit of egalitarian fantasy, based on a deliberate effort to level personal expectations, have predictably led to a species of professional--albeit imaginary--"victimization," increasingly virulent, since the Clinton Presidency. The induced resentment was deliberately ratcheted up under a sociopathic Obama--in part financed by America hating George Soros. It appears to be a major factor, today, in the increasing frenzy in public demonstrations of hatred against President Trump and his supporters.

This is a calculated war on the vision of the Fathers, who specifically forbade even a graduated income tax in the Constitution. Their hope was a social order, where the exceptional individual could rise above the crowd; could achieve greatly & pass on an ascending life style to his posterity. The notions of an egalitarian/internationalist future--the Marxist, Fabian, Bolshevik, Nazi model--or a gigantic human ant hill, were alike totally foreign to them.

We are fortunate that Donald Trump really understands what is at stake; that he knows how to handle bullies, both here & abroad. There is no contemporary issue more important than standing with our President, at a time when actual mobs, many illegally in the land, demonstrate contempt for our heritage & institutions; even as pseudo-intellectual bullies & cowards openly seek to suppress freedom of inquiry & debate on the debased campuses of America.

William Flax

[Download any article at this Web Site onto Flash Drive for safe storage.]

Kipling themed novel, Return Of The Gods, specifically deals with these social issues--a political yarn where the hero challengess the entire Leftist narrative--where the antagonist is The New York Times, behaving exactly as the Times has acted in trying to smear Donald Trump!>>